Pak Military's role in society - Repost

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Oct 1999 02:09

A couple of years ago I first wrote this and posted it in BRF about a year ago. I think it is still relevant as Mushy has taken over. ---------- Pakistan Military''s role in society The military in Pakistan has had an important role in society to put it mildly. It dominates every facet of life in Pakistan. Since Independence from British rule, it has seized and retained power for ~25 of the fifty years. By any stretch that is a long time. In 1997 the creation of National Security Council, by the interim government has institutionalized the power of the military. In fact Gen. Karamat's remarks enunciating foreign policy after the election of Sharief government are reiteration of where the power is. It is interesting to examine the various factors.OrginsThe military owes its origins to the Pre-Independence British Indian Army (BIA). The British subscribing to the "theory of martial races" recruited to the Muslim regiments largely from Punjab and North West Frontier Provinces(NWFP). While the executive and judiciary of British India were largely Hindu, the military had a large proportion of Muslims. This fact was noted by politicians like Sikander Hyat and others. In fact they derived their political strength from the large contingent recruited from modern day Pakistan.The Indian Army which also owes its origins to the BIA is apolitical. However in its traditions it too had its share of political elements which were purged after the 1857 struggle. In fact about 23 regiments were disbanded. Also note the emergence of INA and the RIN mutiny during and after the Second World War. A more recent example is the mutiny of some Sikh units after the 1984 Golden Temple incident. The lesson to learn is internal politics dictate the political values of the military.Role of HistoryHowever the Pak military role is more deeper and complex. It involves itself in every aspect of life in Pakistan. It sees itself as the guardian and protector of the Islamic nature of Pakistan society and culture. It fears cultural assimilation by its neighbor India which has a larger Muslim population. This would mean of loss of its ethos and individuality. It behaves as defacto occupying force. The origins of this behavior can be traced to pre-Mughal Islamic states which were ruled by military governors appointed by the center. The civil and judicial elements were subordinate to the military governor. The Mughal conquest and subsequent Sikh and British rule did nothing to disturb the feudal structure. In fact the entire society was fossilized and did not develop other elements. A comparison of the role of military in other Islamic majority states is striking. In Algeria, Turkey and Egypt the military is secular and leading the fight against fundamentalism. In Saudi Arabia and Gulf countries it is neutral force supportive of the crown. In Malaysia and Indonesia it is largely neutral. In Indonesia, except for the military takeover by Suharto in reaction to Communist coup attempt, the military has been a benign force. Only in Pakistan does the military involve itself in religious matters. Intrestingly Pak military rulers from Field Marshal Ayub Khan to Gen. Zia ul Haq retained their military rank even after assuming Presidential office lending credence to Mao's adage "Power grows from the barrel of the gun." Pakistan behaves as a frontier outpost of the old Islamic empire which could be assimilated culturally by its large neighbor. It adopts extreme positions in religious matters to prove its proximity to orthodoxy.Aristocracy The years of military rule during Zia also saw the breakdown of existing feudal structure. For generations the landed aristocracy, "the notables" wielded enormous influence. The peasantry had to seek their favor to get things done. But during the Zia years the peasants found they could bypass the old regime and work directly with the military. The old aristocracy is remarkable in the relationships it has among itself. It intermarries among members of its class to preserve the linkages to the invaders of the past. It prides itself on its exclusiveness the lineage to ancient conquerors. There is not much interaction between the different strata. Infact along with the military it is akin to a Persian carpet which smothers the aspirations of the evolving Pakistan society. The years of military rule also allowed the development of the trading class as political venues were closed. It is this class of economics minded people who could represent a ray of hope. This is in addition to the traditional traders of Indian origin who migrated after Independence. The fear of cultural assimilation and the fear that somehow these people are not fully integrated into Pak society is the root cause of the Mohajir problem. The end of Cold War has lead to a need for changes in the political makeup of Pak society. The US is not interested in supporting dictatorships. However the military wants to retain power The creation of the National Security Council(NSC) creates a democratic facade to the military rule. No longer does the military have to stage coup. It can act at the behest of the NSC.ConclusionIn conclusion Pakistan society has to be allowed to develop in other dimensions. It has to evolve into a democratic society which is interested in economic development of its citizens and peaceful cooperation with its neighbors. This can happen when the society feels its existence is not threatened; it is confident in its cohesiveness. The common factor among other Islamic countries is their feeling of self and nationhood. The world community can assist this transition by encouraging measures which boost the civilian society and develop confidence in its existence. [This message has been edited by ramana (edited 27-10-1999).]

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Oct 1999 03:04

Thanks spinster. I felt the Forum should read it again now that Mushy is being presented as a reluctant democrat. Wonder what Cohen has to say about this interpretation of Pak military. Yes we should work on gathering links on China. I am not interested in only exposing stuff but to study them. As BR memebers we should not let ourselves be blinkered by Himalayan heights.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Oct 1999 06:35

Bajirao, Thanks for the article by Armughan. I have seen other stuff by this gentleman. I think from the way he spells his first name he is of South Indian origins. I have to read it in its entirety before making comments. Mine was written in one burst.

Badar · Post by **Badar** » 28 Oct 1999 07:36

Hi,<a href="http://www.idsa-india.org/an-may9-9.html">Pakistan: Military Role in Civil Administration</a>, IDSA May 1999.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Oct 1999 11:33

Bajirao, I have exchanged a few emails with this person and I asked him if the name Armugham implied a South Indian ancestry. He said no, and said that the name had some Arabic root - I cannot remember the details.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 28 Oct 1999 17:47

Armughan definitely sounds like Arumughan or Arumugham, both used in the south - knew a couple of guys by that name. BTW, there are quite a few Malayalee Muslims (whom the Paks and Arabs refer to - often derisively - as "malabaris") in Pakistan. There is quite some pro-Pak sentiment in Kerala as well. My father, recently in Cyprus with me, informed me that there is now a "little Pakistan" area in Palakkad (former Palghat) as well as a "Saddam Hussein" street. He also told me that quite a number of Muslims in area Palakkad are thoroughly aggravated by this development, including a "community leader" whom he knows personally. Best Regards JE Menon

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 28 Oct 1999 18:44

Re: Armugham This seems to be a typical Tamil Name. And it is a synonym for one of the Hindu Gods (is it Subramania?). And a muslim by default will not have a Hindu sounding name. May be he is a converted Hindu who later become a Mohajir (to quote the Pakis).Re: J.E Menon's Post In Palakkad town there is a "Saddam Hussein Nagar". And next to this district lies the district of Malappuram, a district which was created to appease the minorities. This place is supposed to have some ISI bases and also there have been incidents of anti-national elements given "full state police escort". Any way the cops are not really pleased with the state-of-affairs here.

Kaushal · Post by **Kaushal** » 28 Oct 1999 20:15

It prides itself on its exclusiveness the lineage to ancient conquerors. It is amazing the number of people in TSP who fancy temselves to be descendants of Genghiz Khan. Must have been a very busy man, and I wonder when he had time to mount his numerous military campaigns. I had a Bangladeshi friend who told me in all seriousness that he was a direct descendant of Genghiz Khan. I commented to him reminding him gently, that is probably unlikely because Genghiz Khan never invaded India, nor did he cross the Khyber and Bolan Pass, let alone go as far as Dacca.Niazi, the TSP General who surrendered in B'Desh, used to boast ' we have never lost a battle in our entire history'. I have always wondered who he meant by 'we'. Well, he can no longer make that boast. Not only did he lose, but he lost ignominiously in one of the large scale surrenders in human history, and that too to a Kaffir army. Kaushal

Peeyoosh · Post by **Peeyoosh** » 29 Oct 1999 09:02

RamanaSlightly different perspective:1) The TSP invests 6% of its GDP in the military, largely to fund revenue expenses. Capital expenditure like India is restricted (correct me if I am wrong but the T-80s and the Agostas represent the only major capex in the 90s - their total cost is around 2.5% of GDP).2) Between the Army and debt servicing, the TSP governemnt's revenue vanishes - it cannot deliver any of the health, education aspirations of people who vote for it without borrowing ina big way - what went on for the first half of this decade. This will not change without either a massive debt forgiveness program or a cut in armed forces expenditure.3) This leads to an unstable equilibrium - the government has to displease either the populace or the army! In the 80s this was circumvented via US funds and aid, - that allowed military expenditure and developement.4) Resurgent Islamic fundamentalism adds to this mix - ignoring this i not correct - the army and a small, influential and vocal section of the TSP population are adopting a jehadi mentality.5) Add to that a popluation growth rate of around 3% p.a. and a proximity to the Middle East and India. ME is rich and India is getting richer. anything less than a 3% GDP grwth rate means DECLINING standards of living.6) Finally three other factors are worth considering - the only private sector leader/entrepraneurs are the very feudals who are in conflict with the army - their skill set (textiles, light engineering) is also getting rapidly outdated. Second - civilian or military the set in the TSP has always (after ZA Bhutto) been very highy centralised with a huge amount of the resouce base being controlled by the govenrment. Third - TSP is faced with a hostile external environment - declining exports, no forex, a huge set of "mandatory" imports (fuel, cooking oil, tea, consumer goods, medicine, autos).Based on these what are the possible stable equilibria that may emerge.1) Islamicisation - Much like Afghanistan the poulation acceps a much lower standard of living in retuen for a Islamic government and a strong military. Very conceivable to my mind.2) Seek an external sponsor - China, Japans, ME, US - someone has tom sponsor the TSP to the tune of US$1.5 billion a year - this would solve all problems - money, fx etc. And the only thing that the TSP has to offer to a sponsor is armed forces and an anti - India stance.3) Restructure economy so that the defexp. is a smaller proportion of GDP but kpet at the same level. Problem is that thgis solution needs time (desperately) - time to find industrilaists (or invite FDI), end enhance GDP levels. That time is not there - so for the interim solution 2 has to be implemented. its debatable whether the TSP can attract substantial fDI of has the industrial base to move onwards. This would also need the TSP giving up its highly central form of government - encouraging powerful industrialists - and in the near run coming to an accomodation with the Industrialist lobby.4) Slash defex - yeah, and my name is Amitabh Bachchan.

In the case of both 1,2 and 3 - I believe the army has to be the dominant player. I believe this battle for resources will dominate the TSP for the next decade at least, so the dynamic encouraging the army's activities is subtly different from before.Would be intersting to speculate on India's stance.

PCShiv - if this perspective is interetsing could we hold of archiving please.[This message has been edited by peeyoosh chadda (edited 28-10-1999).]

Bharat Rakshak

Pak Military's role in society - Repost

Pak Military's role in society - Repost

Re: Pak Military's role in society - Repost

Re: Pak Military's role in society - Repost

Re: Pak Military's role in society - Repost

Re: Pak Military's role in society - Repost

Re: Pak Military's role in society - Repost

Re: Pak Military's role in society - Repost

Re: Pak Military's role in society - Repost

Re: Pak Military's role in society - Repost